[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 189 (Thursday, September 28, 2000)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 58225-58228]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-24672]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 300

[FRL-6877-4]


National Priorities List for Uncontrolled Hazardous Waste Sites

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Final rule; notice of vacatur.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and 
Liability Act of 1980 (``CERCLA'' or ``the Act''), as amended, requires 
that the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency 
Plan (``NCP'') include a list of national priorities among the known 
releases or threatened releases of hazardous substances, pollutants, or 
contaminants throughout the United States. The National Priorities List 
(``NPL'') constitutes this list. The NPL is intended primarily to guide 
the Environmental Protection Agency (``EPA'' or ``the Agency'') in 
determining which sites warrant further investigation to assess the 
nature and extent of public health and environmental risks associated 
with the site and to determine what CERCLA-financed remedial action(s), 
if any, may be appropriate. On October 22, 1999, the EPA promulgated a 
final rule adding the Georgia-Pacific Corporation Hardwood Sawmill 
site, located in Plymouth, North Carolina, to the NPL. EPA today is 
announcing the vacatur of the listing of the Georgia-Pacific Hardwood 
Sawmill site to the NPL and is amending the NPL at 40 CFR part 300, 
appendix B, to delete the site from the NPL in accordance with an order 
issued by the United States Court of Appeals for the District of 
Columbia Circuit (D.C. Cir.) in Georgia-Pacific Corporation v. EPA (No. 
00-1014).

EFFECTIVE DATE: The effective date for this amendment to the NCP is 
September 28, 2000.

ADDRESSES: For addresses for the Headquarters and regional docket, as 
well as further details on the contents of these dockets, section II, 
``Availability of Information to the Public,'' in the SUPPLEMENTARY 
INFORMATION portion of this preamble.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Barbara Vandermer, phone (703) 603-
9018, State, Tribal, and Site Identification Center, Office of 
Emergency and Remedial Response (mail code 5204G), U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20460; 
or contact the Superfund Hotline, phone (800) 424-9346 or (703) 412-
9810 in the Washington, DC, metropolitan area.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The court order vacating the listing 
determination will be added to final docket NPL-FRU26 (10/21/99).

Table of Contents

I. Background
II. Availability of Information to the Public
III. Contents of This Final Rule
IV. Good Cause Exemption From Notice and Comment Rulemaking
V. Administrative Assessments

I. Background

    On October 22, 1999, the EPA promulgated a final rule adding the 
Georgia-Pacific Corporation Hardwood Sawmill site to the National 
Priorities List (NPL) (64 FR 56966). On January 18, 2000, Georgia-
Pacific filed a petition for review of that rule in the United States 
Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (D.C. Circuit). 
EPA and Georgia-Pacific subsequently filed a joint motion requesting 
that the D.C. Circuit enter a judgment vacating EPA's listing decision 
and an order suspending further briefing and argument in the case. The 
Court granted the joint motion on August 21, 2000. Today's rulemaking 
formally removes the Georgia-Pacific Hardwood Sawmill site from the NPL 
in accordance with the D.C. Circuit's order.

II. Availability of Information to the Public

A. Can I Review the Documents Relevant to This Final Rule?

    Yes, documents relating to the evaluation and scoring of the site 
in this final rule are contained in dockets located both at EPA 
Headquarters and in the regional office in Atlanta, Georgia.

B. What Documents Are Available for Review at the Headquarters Docket?

    The Headquarters docket for this rule contains the HRS score 
sheets, the documentation record describing the information used to 
compute the score, pertinent information regarding statutory 
requirements or EPA listing policies that affect the site, and a list 
of documents referenced in the documentation record. The Headquarters 
docket also contains comments received, and the Agency's responses to 
those comments. The Agency's responses are contained in the ``Support 
Document for the Revised National Priorities List Final Rule--October 
1999.''

C. What Documents Are Available for Review at the Regional Docket?

    The regional docket contains all the information in the 
Headquarters docket plus the actual reference documents containing the 
data principally relied upon by EPA in calculating or evaluating the 
HRS score for the site. These reference documents are available only in 
the regional docket.

D. How Do I Access the Documents?

    You may view the documents, by appointment only, after the 
publication of this document. The hours of operation for the 
Headquarters docket are from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, 
excluding Federal holidays. Contact information for the EPA 
Headquarters: Docket Coordinator, Headquarters, U.S. EPA CERCLA Docket 
Office, Crystal Gateway #1, 1st Floor, 1235 Jefferson Davis Highway, 
Arlington, VA 22202, phone (703) 603-8917.
    The contact for the regional docket is Joellen O'Neill, Region 4 
(AL, FL, GA, KY, MS, NC, SC, TN), U.S. EPA, 61 Forsyth Street, SW, 9th 
floor, Atlanta, GA 30303; phone (404) 562-8127. Please contact the 
regional docket for hours.

E. How Can I Obtain a Current List of NPL Sites?

    You may obtain a current list of NPL sites via the Internet at 
http://www.epa.gov/superfund/ (look under site information category) or 
by contacting the Superfund docket (see contact information above).

III. Contents of This Final Rule

    This rule deletes the Georgia-Pacific Corporation Hardwood Sawmill 
site from the General Superfund Section of the NPL.

IV. Good Cause Exemption From Notice and Comment Rulemaking

    The Administrative Procedure Act generally requires agencies to 
provide prior notice and opportunity for public comment before issuing 
a final rule (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). Rules are exempt from this requirement 
if the issuing agency finds for good cause that notice and

[[Page 58226]]

comment are unnecessary (5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B)).
    EPA has determined that it is not necessary to provide prior notice 
and opportunity for comment on the rule amending the NPL to remove the 
Georgia-Pacific Corporation Hardwood Sawmill site from the NPL. The 
rule is promulgated in order to comply with the D.C. Circuit's order 
vacating the listing. The listing is no longer legally in effect by 
order of the D.C. Circuit. Thus, amending the NPL has no legal impact 
and only states the current legal status of the NPL.
    For the same reasons stated above, EPA believes there is good cause 
for making the amending regulations immediately effective. (See 5 
U.S.C. 553(d))

V. Administrative Assessments

A. Executive Order 12866

1. What Is Executive Order 12866?
    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735 (October 4, 1993)), the 
Agency must determine whether a regulatory action is ``significant'' 
and therefore subject to OMB review and the requirements of the 
Executive order. The order defines ``significant regulatory action'' as 
one that is likely to result in a rule that may: (1) Have an annual 
effect on the economy of $100 million or more or adversely affect in a 
material way the economy, a sector of the economy, productivity, 
competition, jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State, 
local, or tribal governments or communities; (2) create a serious 
inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an action taken or planned by 
another agency; (3) materially alter the budgetary impact of 
entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan programs or the rights and 
obligations of recipients thereof; or (4) raise novel legal or policy 
issues arising out of legal mandates, the President's priorities, or 
the principles set forth in the Executive order.
2. Is This Final Rule Subject to Executive Order 12866 Review?
    No, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted this 
regulatory action from Executive Order 12866 review.

B. Unfunded Mandates

1. What Is the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)?
    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public 
Law 104-4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the 
effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal 
governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, EPA 
generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost-benefit 
analysis, for proposed and final rules with ``Federal mandates'' that 
may result in expenditures by State, local, and tribal governments, in 
the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100 million or more in any 
one year. Before EPA promulgates a rule for which a written statement 
is needed, section 205 of the UMRA generally requires EPA to identify 
and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and adopt 
the least costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome alternative 
that achieves the objectives of the rule. The provisions of section 205 
do not apply when they are inconsistent with applicable law. Moreover, 
section 205 allows EPA to adopt an alternative other than the least 
costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome alternative if the 
Administrator publishes with the final rule an explanation why that 
alternative was not adopted. Before EPA establishes any regulatory 
requirements that may significantly or uniquely affect small 
governments, including tribal governments, it must have developed under 
section 203 of the UMRA a small government agency plan. The plan must 
provide for notifying potentially affected small governments; enabling 
officials of affected small governments to have meaningful and timely 
input in the development of EPA regulatory proposals with significant 
Federal intergovernmental mandates; and informing, educating, and 
advising small governments on compliance with the regulatory 
requirements.
2. Does UMRA Apply to This Final Rule?
    No. Today's action will have no impact upon State, local, and 
tribal governments, or on the private sector. The amending regulations 
promulgated today reflect current law and will result in no legal 
impact on public or private entities.

C. Effect on Small Businesses

1. What Is the Regulatory Flexibility Act?
    Pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., 
as amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act 
(SBREFA) of 1996), whenever an agency is required to publish a notice 
of rulemaking for any proposed or final rule, it must prepare and make 
available for public comment a regulatory flexibility analysis that 
describes the effect of the rule on small entities (i.e., small 
businesses, small organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions). 
However, no regulatory flexibility analysis is required if the head of 
an agency certifies the rule will not have a significant economic 
impact on a substantial number of small entities. SBREFA amended the 
Regulatory Flexibility Act to require Federal agencies to provide a 
statement of the factual basis for certifying that a rule will not have 
a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities.
2. Does the Regulatory Flexibility Act Apply to This Final Rule?
    No. The amending regulations promulgated today will have no effect 
on small entities. This is evidenced by the fact that the regulations 
promulgated today have no legal impact. Today's rule only amends the 
CFR to comply with the current legal status of the rules.
    I hereby certify that this rule will not have a significant 
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Therefore, 
this regulation does not require a regulatory flexibility analysis.

D. The Congressional Review Act

1. What Is the Congressional Review Act?
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the 
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally 
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating 
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, 
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the 
United States.
2. How Does the Congressional Review Act Apply to This Rule?
    Section 808 allows the issuing agency to make the rule effective 
sooner than otherwise provided by the CRA if the agency makes a good 
cause finding that notice and public procedure is impracticable, 
unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest. This statement must be 
supported by a brief statement. As stated previously, EPA has made such 
a good cause finding, including the reasons therefor, and has 
established an effective date of September 28, 2000. EPA will submit a 
report containing this rule and other required information to the U.S. 
Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General 
of the United States prior to publication of the rule in the Federal 
Register.

[[Page 58227]]

E. What Could Cause the Effective Date of This Rule To Change?

    A statutory provision that may affect this rule is CERCLA section 
305, which provides for a legislative veto of regulations promulgated 
under CERCLA. Although INS v. Chadha, 462 U.S. 919,103 S. Ct. 2764 
(1983) and Bd. of Regents of the University of Washington v. EPA, 86 
F.3d 1214,1222 (D.C. Cir. 1996) cast the validity of the legislative 
veto into question, EPA has transmitted a copy of this regulation to 
the Secretary of the Senate and the Clerk of the House of 
Representatives.
    If action by Congress under either the CRA or CERCLA section 305 
calls the effective date of this regulation into question, EPA will 
publish a document of clarification in the Federal Register.

F. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

1. What Is the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act?
    Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement 
Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104-113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 
note), directs EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in its 
regulatory activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with 
applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards 
are technical standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods, 
sampling procedures, and business practices) that are developed or 
adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies. The NTTAA directs EPA 
to provide Congress, through OMB, explanations when the Agency decides 
not to use available and applicable voluntary consensus standards.
2. Does the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act Apply to 
This Final Rule?
    No. This rulemaking does not involve technical standards. 
Therefore, EPA did not consider the use of any voluntary consensus 
standards.

G. Executive Order 12898

1. What Is Executive Order 12898?
    Under Executive Order 12898, ``Federal Actions to Address 
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income 
Populations,'' as well as through EPA's April 1995 ``Environmental 
Justice Strategy, OSWER Environmental Justice Task Force Action Agenda 
Report'' and National Environmental Justice Advisory Council, EPA has 
undertaken to incorporate environmental justice into its policies and 
programs. EPA is committed to addressing environmental justice 
concerns, and is assuming a leadership role in environmental justice 
initiatives to enhance environmental quality for all residents of the 
United States. The Agency's goals are to ensure that no segment of the 
population, regardless of race, color, national origin, or income, 
bears disproportionately high and adverse human health and 
environmental effects as a result of EPA's policies, programs, and 
activities, and all people live in clean and sustainable communities.
2. Does Executive Order 12898 Apply to This Final Rule?
    No. Today's final rule will have no effect upon minority or low-
income populations. The amending regulation promulgated today reflect 
current law and is meant only to amend the Code of Federal Regulations 
to comply with the current legal status of the rules.

H. Executive Order 13045

1. What Is Executive Order 13045?
    Executive Order 13045, ``Protection of Children from Environmental 
Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), applies 
to any rule that: (1) Is determined to be ``economically significant'' 
as defined under Executive Order 12866 and (2) concerns an 
environmental health or safety risk that EPA has reason to believe may 
have a disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action 
meets both criteria, the Agency must evaluate the environmental health 
or safety effects of the planned rule on children and explain why the 
planned regulation is preferable to other potentially effective and 
reasonably feasible alternatives considered by the Agency.
2. Does Executive Order 13045 Apply to This Final Rule?
    This rule is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it is not 
an economically significant rule as defined by Executive Order 12866 
and because the Agency does not have reason to believe the 
environmental health or safety risks addressed by this section present 
a disproportionate risk to children.

I. Paperwork Reduction Act

1. What Is the Paperwork Reduction Act?
    According to the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501 et 
seq., an agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not 
required to respond to, a collection of information that requires OMB 
approval under the PRA unless it has been approved by OMB and displays 
a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's 
regulations, after initial display in the preamble of the final rules, 
are listed in 40 CFR part 9. The information collection requirements 
related to this action have already been approved by OMB pursuant to 
the PRA under OMB control number 2070-0012 (EPA ICR No. 574).
2. Does the Paperwork Reduction Act Apply to This Final Rule?
    No. There are no information collection requirements associated 
with today's rule.

J. Executive Order 13132

1. What Is Executive Order 13132?
    Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR 43255, August 
10, 1999), requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure 
``meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the 
development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications.'' 
``Policies that have federalism implications'' is defined in the 
Executive order to include regulations that have ``substantial direct 
effects on the States, on the relationship between the national 
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and 
responsibilities among the various levels of government.''
    Under section 6 of Executive Order 13132, EPA may not issue a 
regulation that has federalism implications, that imposes substantial 
direct compliance costs, and that is not required by statute unless the 
Federal government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct 
compliance costs incurred by State and local governments or EPA 
consults with State and local officials early in the process of 
developing the proposed regulation. EPA also may not issue a regulation 
that has federalism implications and that preempts State law unless the 
Agency consults with State and local officials early in the process of 
developing the proposed regulation.
2. Does Executive Order 13132 Apply to This Final Rule?
    No. This final rule does not have federalism implications. It will 
not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship 
between the national government and the States, or on the distribution 
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government, 
as specified in Executive Order 13132. Thus, the requirements of 
section 6 of the Executive order do not apply to this rule.

[[Page 58228]]

K. Executive Order 13084

1. What Is Executive Order 13084?
    Under Executive Order 13084, EPA may not issue a regulation that is 
not required by statute, that significantly or uniquely affects the 
communities of Indian tribal governments, and that imposes substantial 
direct compliance costs on those communities unless the Federal 
government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance 
costs incurred by the tribal governments or unless EPA consults with 
those governments. If EPA complies by consulting, Executive Order 13084 
requires EPA to provide to the Office of Management and Budget, in a 
separately identified section of the preamble to the rule, a 
description of the extent of EPA's prior consultation with 
representatives of affected tribal governments, a summary of the nature 
of their concerns, and a statement supporting the need to issue the 
regulation. In addition, Executive Order 13084 requires EPA to develop 
an effective process permitting elected officials and other 
representatives of Indian tribal governments ``to provide meaningful 
and timely input in the development of regulatory policies on matters 
that significantly or uniquely affect their communities.''
2. Does Executive Order 13084 Apply to This Final Rule?
    No. This rule does not significantly or uniquely affect the 
communities of Indian tribal governments because it does not 
significantly or uniquely affect their communities. Accordingly, the 
requirements of section 3(b) of Executive Order 13084 do not apply to 
this rule.

L. Executive Order 12875

1. What Is Executive Order 12875?
    Under Executive Order 12875, Enhancing the Intergovernmental 
Partnership, EPA may not issue a regulation that is not required by 
statute and that creates a mandate upon a State, local, or tribal 
government unless the Federal government provides the funds necessary 
to pay the direct compliance costs incurred by those governments or EPA 
consults with those governments.
2. Does Executive Order 12875 Apply to This Rule?
    No. Today's action will have no impact upon State, local, or tribal 
governments. The amending regulations promulgated today reflect current 
law and will result in no legal impact on public or private entities.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 300

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Chemicals, 
Hazardous substances, Hazardous waste, Intergovernmental relations, 
Natural resources, Oil pollution, Penalties, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements, Superfund, Water pollution control, Water 
supply.

    Dated: September 18, 2000.
Timothy Fields, Jr.,
Assistant Administrator, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response.

    40 CFR part 300 is amended as follows:

PART 300--[AMENDED]

    1. The authority citation for part 300 continues to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1321(c)(2); 42 U.S.C. 9601-9657; E.O. 
12777, 56 FR 54757, 3 CFR, 1991 Comp., p. 351; E.O. 12580, 52 FR 
2923, 3 CFR, 1987 Comp., p. 193.

Appendix B to Part 300--[Amended]

    2. Table 1 of appendix B to part 300 is amended by removing the 
site ``Georgia-Pacific Corporation Hardwood Sawmill'', Plymouth, NC.

[FR Doc. 00-24672 Filed 9-27-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P